How we teach stalls

[Roundsounds]

54 minutes ago, Thruster88 said:

I don't think I have ever seen a video of an aircraft stalling and hitting the ground without at least a quarter of a turn of rotation. The rudder can pick up a wing however its purpose is to stop yaw. No yaw no spin.

 

It is not that hard to fly correct airspeed at all times.

The critical thing is angle of attack, which is closely related to “stick position”. As you stated, rudder is used to prevent yaw. Unfortunately many people are taught and believe it’s used to pick up a wing approaching / at the stall. If you’re good enough to pick up a wing during a stall you wouldn’t have stalled in the first place. 

[facthunter]

I had a 7 ECA but I'd prefer a stronger plane that didn't have FRISE ailerons and as exposed pitch trim cables and had a friction nut for the throttle. Otherwise I liked it a lot but would not LEND it.   Nev

[facthunter]

I think the "picking up the dropped wing with rudder" is a BIT oversold as a universal response. SPEED planes used to have very small rudders. Just get a few more knots and the plane  reacts normally. DO NOT pull the stick  BACK.. That's what seals your fate. Nev

[Blueadventures]

22 minutes ago, facthunter said:

I think the "picking up the dropped wing with rudder" is a BIT oversold as a universal response. SPEED planes used to have very small rudders. Just get a few more knots and the plane  reacts normally. DO NOT pull the stick  BACK.. That's what seals your fate. Nev

Agree, that's what my reply was saying rudder use and speed increase.

[Area-51]

This is a good couple of examples addressing the original question posted; its got some great footage of how the elevator reacted with buffet in the moment, and also how much elevator was being used during the pattern in general while trying to slow the aircraft up.

 

It's a little rear to hear these kinds of stories because the pilot in command is generally often too dead to talk about it.

 

 

 

 

 

[Roundsounds]

3 hours ago, Area-51 said:

This is a good couple of examples addressing the original question posted; its got some great footage of how the elevator reacted with buffet in the moment, and also how much elevator was being used during the pattern in general while trying to slow the aircraft up.

 

It's a little rear to hear these kinds of stories because the pilot in command is generally often too dead to talk about it.

 

 

 

 

 

Have a look at the aileron position as it “dipped” the wing versus the aileron position during other shots. He was holding off bank, likely the result of a skidding turn. A nasty combination of being very close to the critical angle of attack and a skidding turn, as he said very close to a spin entry. This is sort of scenario should be a standard training sequence at a safe altitude with an appropriately qualified instructor in an aeroplane certified for spinning. It’s not about spin recovery, but knowing the signs of an impending spin entry. 

[facthunter]

Training to a max bank angle of 30 degrees can promote that. OK for Airliners BUT......   Nev

[Roundsounds]

16 minutes ago, facthunter said:

Training to a max bank angle of 30 degrees can promote that. OK for Airliners BUT......   Nev

It’s the yank not the bank that kills people!

 

People then keep bank angles low and “help” the turn with rudder and skid. 

Edited February 22 by Roundsounds

[facthunter]

Exactly. An unintended but obvious consequence. I often wonder if  anyone is thinking anymore.  Rules for FOOLS. Understanding for thinkers/experts..  Nev

[BrendAn]

On 21/02/2024 at 6:37 PM, facthunter said:

I had a 7 ECA but I'd prefer a stronger plane that didn't have FRISE ailerons and as exposed pitch trim cables and had a friction nut for the throttle. Otherwise I liked it a lot but would not LEND it.   Nev

an airbatic 7 eca

[facthunter]

Yeah Citabria  backwards.  Nev

[djpacro]

A recent USA AOPA article is relevant: https://aopa.org/training-and-safety/air-safety-institute/accident-analysis/flight-training-accident-report

Quote

Additionally, there have been substantial changes in stall recovery training at the airline transport pilot (ATP) level, the highest level of civilian pilot certification. These changes, which took effect in 2012, emphasize the importance of reducing the angle of attack (AOA) as the first and primary step in stall recovery. Although this emphasis on AOA reduction instead of powering out of the stall has been most pronounced at the ATP level, the attention on proper stall recovery has benefitted the entire industry. .....

The aviation industry has done an excellent job of messaging the risk of a stall/spin accident when overshooting base to final. The industry should make similar efforts to message the risk of stall during takeoff, climbout, and go-around, and emphasize the importance of energy awareness in this critical phase of flight. ....

Instructors should review the FAA’s stall recovery template (Figure 5-10 of the Airplane Flying Handbook) to ensure that they are teaching stall recovery to current guidelines.4 Specialized training in upset prevention and recovery training (UPRT) is also encouraged.

CASA issued AC61-16, Spin avoidance and stall recovery training , about 4 years ago which is consistent with Figure 5-10 of the Airplane Flying Handbook.

However, the CASA Flight Instructor Manual has not been revised per ATSB Investigation AO-2017-096 of 22/5/2019.

 

In the USA:

Quote

Instructional aviation has a lower accident rate than GA overall and has seen safety improve at a faster pace.

Not so per the Australian Transport Safety Bureau AR-2020-047 Aviation Occurrence Statistics (rates update) 2010 to 2019 (the latest data):

Quote

Further, the number of GA operational-related accidents and serious incidents, per year, increased over the period. Instructional flying was the main contributor to this operational-related increase."

To repeat: in the USA flight instruction safety has improved whereas in Australia it has worsened. 

 

From Issue 107 of SportPilot Magazine we have this:

Fine as far as it goes however, I didn't see any guidance on the use of rudder. It states to "level the wings" without explaining the technique.

 

Better to stick with the FAA's Figure 5-10 and associated text of the Airplane Flying Handbook.

[CT9000]

On 19/02/2024 at 8:16 AM, cscotthendry said:

I had a situation some time ago and it got me thinking about how we teach stalls.

I was on a short final on a fairly gusty day. The gusts were varying 10-12 Kts above / below the stated wind speed. When I was about 150' AGL, the plane started an uncommanded left bank. I started to correct in the usual manner with a slight pressure on the ailerons, but the plane didn't respond as I expected it to. Thinking I was caught up in a Willy-Willy or rotor, I decided to go around. From my training, I pushed the nose over sharply, gave it full throttle and began bringing the flaps in. I've done plenty of go arounds, so they hold no mystery or fear for me.

I took me a while to figure out that I had let my airspeed bleed off and flying out of a gust, had put me into a stall. It wasn't anything like how I encountered stalls in my training / BFRs.

In training and review sessions, we're always taught to pull the power back, keep the altitude level by steadily pulling back on the elevators and then, just as the plane starts to buffet, snap that last little bit of elevator to make the nose snap over as we enter the stall.

 

But that's NOT how it happens in real life. The stall can be insidious and you might not recognize it as a stall at first. I'm certain that this has happened to too many pilots who didn't survive to learn the real lesson. 
 

I believe that including that snap over at the point of stall gives pilots the wrong impression of how stalls feel.

 

What say you all?

Re reading this story over a cuppa. I do not believe that the aircraft did actually stall. To stall you need to reach the "stall stick position" otherwise you cannot get to the critical angle of attack and therefore no stall. Yes it dropped a wing but that is not necessarily a stall just a response to a gust.   Stalls are not to be feared just need to be managed.

[Roundsounds]

On 8/3/2024 at 9:54 PM, CT9000 said:

Re reading this story over a cuppa. I do not believe that the aircraft did actually stall. To stall you need to reach the "stall stick position" otherwise you cannot get to the critical angle of attack and therefore no stall. Yes it dropped a wing but that is not necessarily a stall just a response to a gust.   Stalls are not to be feared just need to be managed.

Stick position can correlate to exceeding the critical angle. The “stall stick position” seems to be gathering momentum at a similar rate to the Beggs Muller spin recovery technique, which I see as a dangerous trend. There are a number of factors where the critical angle can be exceeded without achieving the “SSP”. CofG and gusts being a couple. 
How would a pilot respond differently in the case described in this post given it had / had not stalled? 

[cscotthendry]

11 hours ago, Roundsounds said:

Stick position can correlate to exceeding the critical angle. The “stall stick position” seems to be gathering momentum at a similar rate to the Beggs Muller spin recovery technique, which I see as a dangerous trend. There are a number of factors where the critical angle can be exceeded without achieving the “SSP”. CofG and gusts being a couple. 
How would a pilot respond differently in the case described in this post given it had / had not stalled? 

I'm very wary of formulaic rules like “Stall Stick Position means it's stalled, otherwise it's not.”

There are too many variables in flying to make formulaic assessments like that.

And I guess, that comes back to my point. Pilots are taught implicitly, that the aircraft is stalled when the nose is pointing at the heavens and the controls are back in your chest, because that's how it was in training.
 

And the corollary to that is that if the nose isn't pointing way up in the sky and I don't have the stick back in my crotch, then the aircraft's not stalled. Which is what I think the other poster was claiming.

 

That's almost always going to be followed by confusion and a loud BANG!

[Area-51]

17 hours ago, Roundsounds said:

Stick position can correlate to exceeding the critical angle. The “stall stick position” seems to be gathering momentum at a similar rate to the Beggs Muller spin recovery technique, which I see as a dangerous trend. There are a number of factors where the critical angle can be exceeded without achieving the “SSP”. CofG and gusts being a couple. 
How would a pilot respond differently in the case described in this post given it had / had not stalled? 

Beggs Muller is not a given for "all" aircraft. There are a multitude of subjective study papers and conclusions on this with each individual aircraft responding differently according to its inherent design, position of CG in the moment, and orientation of autorotation. Beggs Muller is not a blanket one size fits all affect. Anybody writing it off as a "fad" does not yet understand the intricacies of it.... Additionally anybody that thinks they need to be looking at the stars with the horizontal stabiliser beyond its positive or negative stalled position is not yet mentally flying through a three dimensional space and should go acquire some more advanced and challenging training.

Edited March 11 by Area-51

[CT9000]

19 hours ago, Roundsounds said:

Stick position can correlate to exceeding the critical angle. The “stall stick position” seems to be gathering momentum at a similar rate to the Beggs Muller spin recovery technique, which I see as a dangerous trend. There are a number of factors where the critical angle can be exceeded without achieving the “SSP”. CofG and gusts being a couple. 
How would a pilot respond differently in the case described in this post given it had / had not stalled? 

The stall stick position can vary it is not a fixed thing but is real.   Of course the CG will move it.

Discussion of SSP is a good thing to help understand what is actually happening during the stall.

As far as the response goes, by all means step on the rudder to stop the yaw.

If a gust caused the wing to stall it would be only momentary and would have recovered from the stall condition before the pilot had time to react.

I agree that the teaching methods may not be all that good. It is far smarter to teach that unloading the wing is what fixes the stall which is exactly what reducing back stick does. 

 

[facthunter]

IF you are going too  slow controls feel vague, light and unresponsive. There may  also be prestall buffeting. The nose may drop uncommanded.. This should be fully covered early in  straight and level flight.. Unload the wings and accelerate the plane. Without power you''ll use the normal 150 odd feet as a minimum. You shouldn't FEAR stalls. Just treat them with the  respect they deserve and APPY the correctly learned response  and don't do the reactive ones automatically.. You'll also be very unlikely to spin if you don't pull the stick  back.   Nev

[CT9000]

7 hours ago, facthunter said:

IF you are going too  slow controls feel vague, light and unresponsive. There may  also be prestall buffeting. The nose may drop uncommanded.. This should be fully covered early in  straight and level flight.. Unload the wings and accelerate the plane. Without power you''ll use the normal 150 odd feet as a minimum. You shouldn't FEAR stalls. Just treat them with the  respect they deserve and APPY the correctly learned response  and don't do the reactive ones automatically.. You'll also be very unlikely to spin if you don't pull the stick  back.   Nev

Thanks for the addition Nev, I think we are on the same page. I would like to add that speed is not the primary problem in a stall it is the wing load. The normal quoted stall speed is at 1G and is a bit meaning less. eg. if you have a quoted stall speed of say 45Kts. and push foward till the seat load gets light the stall speed may be less than half that, if you are in a steep level turn the stall speed may well be 1.5 times that cos you are pulling back to maintain level. It all comes down to load.

[facthunter]

Lots of load = lots of drag.. For the tailfeathers to function you need a bit of wind over them. The propwash can do that on the conventional plane.  Nev

[Freizeitpilot]

An oldie, but a goodie.

 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0oms3r1q6Gs&pp=ygUTU3RhbGxpbmcgZm9yIHNhZmV0eQ%3D%3D

[facthunter]

8/10 Need to cover spirals.   Nev

[BrendAn]

On 01/06/2024 at 11:33 AM, Freizeitpilot said:

An oldie, but a goodie.

 

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0oms3r1q6Gs&pp=ygUTU3RhbGxpbmcgZm9yIHNhZmV0eQ%3D%3D

great video